Netanyahu Vs. the President—of Israel - The Daily Beast Bitter Rivalry Netanyahu Vs. the President—of Israel Israeli President Reuven Rivlin is a man of contradictions and a bitter rival of the prime minister’s. He is set to make a call that will determine the country’s future—and Netanyahu’s political career. Nira Yadin 03.16.15 9:15 AM ET The man who will ultimately determine who Israel’s next prime minister will be will get zero votes in the national elections on Tuesday. He is not running for office and no longer sits in parliament. Reuven “Ruvi” Rivlin, elected Israel’s 10th president eight months ago, now holds a largely ceremonial office and is no longer part of the legislature. Indeed, he has few key powers—but he’s about to exercise his most important one. A popular political hawk from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party for some 30 years, he was a bitter rival of the incumbent Israeli leader and falls to his right.

He was a fierce opponent of Israel’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005, remains firmly against the creation of a Palestinian state, and is a staunch defender of Israel’s settlement enterprise in the West Bank. Despite his unabashed nationalism, he also may be Israel’s most vocal and highest-ranking critic of anti-Arab racism and discrimination, a province generally left to Arab and left-wing politicians. Before he was president, as speaker of the Israeli parliament, he routinely voted against bills he deemed anti-democratic and harmful to Arabs, who make up 20 percent of the Israeli population. After the votes are counted on March 17, Rivlin will meet with the head of each party to receive his or her recommendation for prime minister, and will then decide which party leader to tap to assemble a coalition. Rivlin has already indicated that he will confer the task on the leader with the best prospects of forming a coalition and not necessarily the party with the highest number of seats. This is good news and bad news for Netanyahu, who seeks a fourth term as Israel’s prime minister. His ruling Likud party is falling behind in the polls but he retains the best chance of assembling a stable coalition.

The Likud and its biggest rival, the center-left Zionist Union party led by Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, Israel’s former chief negotiator with the Palestinians, have been running neck and neck in recent weeks, but a most recent poll put the Likud at up to four seats behind its main opponent. However, the ruling party still has more natural allies among the far-right, center-right and religious parties and should still have an easier time than the Zionist Union assembling the 61 mandates out of 120 needed for a majority. But in the event of a close race, Rivlin is expected to call for a unity government, a nightmare scenario for Netanyahu who in a recent TV interview ruled out the option. Just three months ago Netanyahu called for early elections, claiming he was unable to govern due to ideological differences with his coalition partners, including Livni. In a unity government, Likud is set to weaken further and Netanyahu may regret the day he decided to dissolve Israel’s 19th Knesset less than two years after it took office.

In a widely quoted but unconfirmed TV report, Rivlin is said to have indicated that he would ask the would-be unity government to push through legislation on electoral reform to amend the current system by which large parties must court smaller parties, often with opposing perspectives, to cobble together a coalition. We want to avoid “turning into Italy,” Rivlin is reported to have told a group of visitors, where elections are held even more often than in Israel. Though they are from the same party, Rivlin and Netanyahu have been bitter rivals and had a long history of locking horns. As a senior Likud politician, Rivlin was often defiant of Netanyahu, voting against bills backed by the prime minister even when coalition discipline was invoked, as was the case in 2013 when the government voted in favor of releasing convicted Palestinian terrorists as a gesture to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. Rivlin was also often critical of Netanyahu and other Knesset members on the Right for remarks and actions he deemed were harmful to Israel’s democratic principles.

In turn, Netanyahu did not appoint Rivlin to a new term as Knesset speaker in the 2013 elections, a role Rivlin held twice, and did everything he could to prevent Rivlin from becoming president. But alas, the 75-year-old was much too popular, a unifying figure who drew votes from party members across the political spectrum. “A defeat for Netanyahu!” “The end of Netanyahu?” “Netanyahu’s worst nightmare,” screamed the headlines in July when Rivlin was elected. It has been suggested that he is now in the prime position to settle scores with Netanyahu, a move his office denies is even being considered. While acknowledging that there have been tensions between Rivlin and Netanyahu, the director-general of the President’s Office, Harel Tubi, says the president and the prime minister have a “functional relationship” that is “sound, if not very good.” “The difficulties in the past and their relationship in the period preceding these elections are not relevant and don’t factor into the president’s considerations. The public knows Rivlin, he is a man who knows how to set [these things] aside, especially when it comes to influencing the fate of the country,” Tubi told The Daily Beast this week.

Get The Beast In Your Inbox! Daily DigestStart and finish your day with the top stories from The Daily Beast. Cheat SheetA speedy, smart summary of all the news you need to know (and nothing you don't). By clicking "Subscribe," you agree to have read the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy Subscribe Thank You! You are now subscribed to the Daily Digest and Cheat Sheet. We will not share your email with anyone for any reason “This transition from a politician to a president, a position of public trust devoid of political identity is not a rapid process,” Tubi says, and Rivlin has been preparing for months. When the time comes to entrust a party leader with forming the next coalition, Rivlin’s deliberations will not remain private or hidden, and the public will know what he’s thinking, Tubi says. Rivlin is widely seen as a person who exudes integrity and he has a reputation for defending civil liberties and minority rights and standing firmly by his beliefs, popular or not. Even those that cost him politically.

Few expected Rivlin to follow in the footsteps of his predecessor Shimon Peres, a Nobel Peace Prize winner and a staunch supporter of peace talks, who used his seven years in office to elevate the presidency—a largely symbolic role—to heightened prominence both in Israel and across the world. But in just under a year, Rivlin has gained much publicity for emerging as a key advocate of Arab-Jewish rapprochement and coexistence. He regularly meets with Arab leaders, visits Arab-majority cities in Israel, and speaks passionately and frequently against displays of anti-Arab racism, which he’s termed an Israeli “disease.” “It was a harsh thing to say,” admits Tubi. “It was provocative, but it was a call to action. It forced the public to look in the mirror and say ‘We are starting a process’ [to reverse this].” “He sees the rift between Jews and Arabs in Israeli society as a rift that must be healed and if it’s not taken care of, then it expands and expands until it reaches levels of racism and incitement, and this endangers all of Israeli society. This is a sort of mission [for him],” he says. This mission has earned him fierce criticism—and much admiration.

As part of his advocacy work, he’s teamed up with an Israeli-Arab boy for a campaign against bullying, canceled the appearance at an event of a popular Israeli singer over anti-Arab lyrics, personally called the parents of a young Druze university student who was attacked in Jerusalem by a group of Jewish Israelis who heard him speaking Arabic, and most recently offered a prize to the Israeli soccer team that does the most to eradicate violence and anti-Arab racism. Four months ago, days after a Palestinian man ran over pedestrians in Jerusalem killing two people including a 3-month-old girl, Rivlin attended a memorial for the 1956 Kfar Kassem massacre in which 49 Arab-Israeli men, women and children were shot dead by Israeli Border Police. At the ceremony, Rivlin called the incident a “terrible crime,” asked for forgiveness and urged an end to the cycle of violence. He was the first Israeli official to ever attend the annual event and was slammed for it, in part for seemingly linking the massacre and the Jerusalem terror attack, which preceded several such attacks over the following months, bringing Jewish-Arab tensions to unprecedented heights. To those in the Arab community, the gesture had promise.

“The visit was seen as the beginning of a maturity process for the Israeli Jewish community,” says Mohammad Darawshe, the director of equality and shared society program at the Givat Haviva Center, a leading NGO working for co-existence between Arabs and Jews. “It was seen as him having enough of a solid Jewish identity to understand that Israel is not just a state for Jews, but also for its Arab community,” he says. Lamenting the fact that Rivlin has no executive powers to translate his approach into policy, Darawshe says that at a time of disastrous political relations between Jews and Arabs, “Israelis like Rivlin act as a counter to radical right-wingers and those who don’t want to live together.” Rivlin’s right-wing bona fides, like his opposition to a Palestinian state, don’t seem to work against him either. “He is seen as even more sincere,” says Darawshe. “His willingness to talk to people who do not share his vision works in his favor. There is no problem with someone holding a right-wing perception as long as he wants to sit and talk.” Dialogue is Rivlin’s modus operandi and forte, it seems.

Less than a week before elections, the president summoned over 100 Israeli non-voters to his official residence and urged them to reconsider. “A low electoral turnout is an incubator for social deterioration. It only widens the dangerous gap between the elected officials and the public; it empowers extremist, violent groups, which endanger all of us,” Rivlin charged. “Despair and apathy, are not the solution. My friends, go and vote!”” This last sentiment is being echoed by party leaders across the spectrum, but especially by Netanyahu who—alarmed by the recent polls—launched a media blitz late last week to warn of the imminent demise of the State of Israel should anyone but the Likud party lead the next government. He’s also taken on an increasingly paranoid tone, claiming a “huge international effort”was under way to unseat him. At a right-wing rally in Tel Aviv Sunday night attended by tens of thousands, Netanyahu warned of the rise of a left-wing government supported by “fortunes funneled from abroad” and the Arab parties who form the Joint (Arab) List. With a country divided and talk of foreign plots, whatever happens on Tuesday, it seems Rivlin may be the least of Netanyahu’s problems.

READ THIS LIST Reuven Rivlin, New President of Israel · Guardian Liberty Voice Share on Facebook Follow on Facebook Add to Google+ Connect on Linked in Subscribe by Email Print This Post Reuven Rivlin, a veteran lawmaker, will be at the helm of the affairs of the state of Israel as the new president. Rivlin, who succeeds Shimon Peres as the 10th president, is not a political novice. Chosen by members of the parliament, the veteran lawyer from the right-wing Likud party will cease to be a Member of the Knesset (MK) after June 10. In a secret ballot, Rivlin defeated MP Meir Sheetrit by 63 to 53 to take the position. It is reported that Rivlin will take up the post after Peres, 90, steps down in July following his seven-year term. Rivlin’s role will be largely ceremonial and he will have no role in the ensuing dialogue with Palestine. The newly-elected president does not share the same view as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as far as Palestine is concerned. He opposes the formation of a separate Palestine and supports Jewish settlements along the occupied West Bank.

His personal view of the issue is at odds with the Prime Minister and the party, leaving him open to scrutiny by the party and by other nations. No longer claiming to be affiliated to any party, Rivlin, who won in the second round of voting on Tuesday, called himself a “man of the nation.” Speaking ecstatically to a Knesset member, Rivlin, the new President of Israel, announced his mission of letting democracy flourish in Israel. Born in 1939 in Jerusalem to Yosef Yoel Rivlin, the 74-year old Rivlin studied law and graduated from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. A vegetarian since the late 1960s and a father of four, he is a big fan of the Beitar Jerusalem football club and has been so since he watched his first game in 1946. Elected to the 12th Knesset in 1988, Rivin went on to serve as chairman of the Likud party until 1993. After losing his seat in 1992, he returned to the Knesset four years later.

Rising to power in 1999, he was chosen as Israel’s Minister of Communications in 2001 and held the post for two years. In 2003, he was elected as the Knesset Speaker, a role that earned him national criticism. As an outspoken critic of Ariel Sharon’s policies, the lawyer constantly broke convention with publicized spats. Top posts in Israel typically demand political neutrality and Rivlin, with his views on Sharon, was a supporter of the disengagement plan. Opposing the decision to declare Israeli legislation illegal, Rivlin had a very public spat with Aharon Barak, then the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Rivlin has been an outspoken supporter of the Jewish settlement along the West Bank, and was quoted in 2010 to have declared that he would accept Palestinians as Israelis and not carve the state in two. He also made headlines with his criticism of Pope Benedict XVI, whose previous service in the Nazi army was called out when the Pope addressed Israel at the Yad Vashem memorial. Rivlin, who invited the ire of many Members of Knesset (MK) and the political right, was the center of controversy in 2010.

Ignoring the advice from the committee that wanted Haneed Zoabi, a Balad MK, removed for his role in the Gaza flotilla raid in 2010, Rivlin earned praise from foreign and liberal Israelis for his efforts to protect democracy. Campaigning for the recognition of the Armenian genocide, the active politician gives speeches on the issue. He insists that the genocide is not a political issue, but a reminder of the tragedy that Armenia faced during WWI. He also insisted in 2012 that the genocide was not an accusation against Turkey or its government. Prime Minister Netanyahu congratulated Rivlin on his election and promised joint action in unifying Israel internally and against external challenges. Israelis know that Rivlin, the new president of Israel, has a tough act to follow. Peres is a Nobel Peace Prize winner and a Knight Grand Cross of the Order of St. Michael and St. George -honors he received for his work in Israel. After being sworn in as Israel’s newest president on July 24, Rivlin is expected to shift his focus from international affairs to domestic issues.

By Rathan Paul Harshavardan Israeli President’s Role Won’t be Ceremonial if the Outcome is Close - The New York Times The New York Times Live Coverage | Israeli President’s Role Won’t be Ceremonial if the Outcome is Close Search Israel Elections: Results and Analysis Jeffrey Marcus 6:00 am ET Mar 17, 2015 2015-03-18T00:27:50+00:00 The New York Times Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his chief challenger, Isaac Herzog of the center-left Zionist Union, appeared to win about the same number of seats in Parliament on Tuesday, according to Israeli news media and exit polls. Expect a protracted and messy process to form the next governing coalition after official results are announced. The New York Times correspondents Jodi Rudoren, Isabel Kershner and Diaa Hadid provided updates and analysis from Israel.

3:32 pm ET Mar 17, 2015 2015-03-17T19:33:13+00:00 Isabel Kershner JERUSALEM — Presidents of Israel play a largely symbolic role most of the time. But general elections give them a very consequential task to perform: designating who will become the next prime minister. This time, the ritual will be spiced by some piquant personal history. Under Israel’s electoral system , the president gives one party and its leader a mandate to try to assemble a coalition commanding at least 61 seats in the 120-seat Knesset. It need not be the party that won the most seats; rather, the president is supposed to choose whichever leader has best chance of forging a governing majority. The current president, Israel’s 10th, is Reuven Rivlin, elected last year by the Knesset in a secret ballot. On Wednesday, Mr.

Rivlin will probably undertake a round of consultations with the leaders of each party that won seats, gauging support for the two likely front-runners: the conservative incumbent, Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud, and Isaac Herzog of the center-left Zionist Union bloc, which includes his Labor Party. The Zionist Union was ahead in the last published polls, but neither side went into Election Day appearing to have a clear-cut majority of 61 seats in hand. That would give Mr. Rivlin some leeway to choose for himself — a scenario Mr. Netanyahu may have wanted to avoid. Mr. Rivlin, a former speaker of the Knesset, is a veteran Likud politician, but Mr. Netanyahu backed him for the presidency grudgingly and belatedly, and he did little to hide his personal differences with Mr. Rivlin, who is known by the nickname Ruby. In fact, Mr. Netanyahu tried for months to block Mr. Rivlin’s candidacy behind the scenes, and even examined whether the presidency could be abolished. As late as a few hours before the deadline for submitting candidacies, Mr. Netanyahu was reportedly still trying to pre-empt Mr.

Rivlin by lining up support for an alternative: Elie Wiesel, the Holocaust survivor and Noble Peace Prize laureate. (Mr. Wiesel, who lives in New York, said in interviews in the Israeli media that he politely turned Mr. Netanyahu down — not least because he is not an Israeli citizen, though it would not have taken long to become one.) In the end, Mr. Rivlin got the post, and all Israeli eyes will be on him after the vote, especially if it leaves the conservative and center-left blocs roughly tied, as the polls suggest it might. In that case, Mr. Rivlin might bring Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Herzog together and propose that they form a “grand unity” coalition and rotate as prime ministers. That scenario ought to awaken some old personal memories for Mr. Herzog . His father, Chaim Herzog, was Israel’s sixth president in 1984, when a general election resulted in a 60-60 tie. The two sides wound up forming a grand unity coalition , with Shimon Peres of Labor and Yitzhak Shamir of Likud agreeing to take turns as prime minister , for two years apiece. Mr.

Peres went on to become president, serving from 2007 to 2014. Shimon Peres | prime minister and president of Israel | Britannica.com prime minister and president of Israel Written By: Prime minister and president of Israel Also known as Henry A. Kissinger Shimon Peres, original name Shimon Perski (born August 16?, 1923, Wiszniew, Poland [now Vishnyeva, Belarus]; see Researcher’s Note —died September 28, 2016, Ramat Gan , Israel ), Polish-born Israeli statesman, who served as both prime minister (1984–86 and 1995–96) and president (2007–14) of Israel and as leader of the Israel Labour Party (1977–92, 1995–97, and 2003–05).

In 1993, in his role as Israeli foreign minister, Peres helped negotiate a peace accord with Yāsir ʿArafāt , chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), for which they, along with Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin , were jointly awarded the Nobel Prize for Peace in 1994. Shimon Peres, 2009. Photograph by Pete Souza/The White House After the signing of the Declaration of Principles on Palestinian self-government (1993), U.S. … CNN ImageSource Peres immigrated with his family to Palestine in 1934. In 1947 he joined the Haganah movement, a Zionist military organization, under the direction of David Ben-Gurion , who soon became his political mentor. When Israel achieved independence in May 1948, Prime Minister Ben-Gurion appointed Peres, then only 24 years old, head of Israel’s navy .

In 1952 he was appointed deputy director general of the Ministry of Defense, and he later served as director general (1953–59) and deputy defense minister (1959–65), during which service he stepped up state weapons production, initiated a nuclear research program, and established overseas military alliances, most notably with France. Peres resigned in 1965 to join Ben-Gurion in founding a new party, Rafi , in opposition to the succeeding prime minister, Levi Eshkol . David Ben-Gurion (centre) walking with Shimon Peres (left), 1969. © The State of Israel Government Press Office The Rafi Party was unsuccessful, and in 1967 Peres initiated merger negotiations between the Mapai (Ben-Gurion’s former party) and the Ahdut Avodah, a more leftist workers’ party, which led to the establishment of the Israel Labour Party , of which he became deputy secretary-general. He became defense minister in the Labour cabinet of Rabin in 1974.

In 1977 Peres became head of the Labour Party and, as such, was twice defeated (1977, 1981) by Menachem Begin of the Likud party as a candidate for prime minister before winning access to the post after the indecisive elections of 1984. In September 1984 Peres and Yitzhak Shamir , head of Likud, formed a power-sharing agreement, with Peres as prime minister for the first half of a 50-month term and Shamir as deputy prime minister and foreign minister; the roles were reversed for the second 25-month period. Under Peres’s moderate and conciliatory leadership, Israel withdrew its forces in 1985 from their controversial incursion into Lebanon. After similarly indecisive elections in 1988, the Labour and Likud parties formed another coalition government, with Peres as finance minister and Shamir as prime minister; this coalition lasted only until 1990, when Likud was able to form a government without Labour support. Britannica Stories Ringling Bros.

Folds Its Tent In February 1992, in the first primary election ever held by a major Israeli party, Peres lost the Labour leadership to Rabin. When Labour won in the general elections in June and Rabin became prime minister of Israel in July, Peres was brought into the cabinet as foreign minister. After the Israel-PLO accord was signed in 1993, Peres handled the negotiations with the PLO over the details of the pact’s implementation. Following the assassination of Rabin in 1995, Peres took over as prime minister. In May 1996 he was narrowly defeated in his bid for reelection by Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud. Peres declined to seek reelection as leader of the Labour Party in 1997 but stayed active in politics, serving as foreign minister (2001–02), deputy prime minister (2001–02), and vice prime minister (2005) in the national unity government led by Likud’s Ariel Sharon . In 2003 Peres resumed the chair of the Labour Party but was unexpectedly defeated in the party’s leadership election in November 2005.

A few weeks later he left the Labour Party to join the centrist party Kadima . From 2007 to 2014 Peres served as president of Israel, a largely ceremonial post. Yāsir ʿArafāt (left), Shimon Peres (centre), and Yitzhak Rabin with their Nobel … Copyright T. Bergsaker/Sygma Remarks by The Vice President and President of Israel Shimon Peres at an Expanded Group Meeting | whitehouse.gov Remarks by The Vice President and President of Israel Shimon Peres at an Expanded Group Meeting Presidency Jerusalem 9:16 A.M. (local) PRESIDENT PERES: Well, I want to express our profound appreciation for your visit, not just because you are the Vice President of the United States and the most senior person to visit our region at the time; because for us you are a stoic friend, a man with profound judgment. You were the youngest senator in the United States. And from that age, so to speak, you showed friendship, understanding, and judgment, which we appreciate to this day. We think you are coming on a mission of peace. You understand there are two sides to the mission.

And I dont see, I think, any contradiction in between being friendly and understanding to the two sides. And since the mission is peace, we are following the same mission. I want to say that Im not impressed by the perception of the agreement about the proximity talks, because the situation is both more serious and also maybe more promising. If I compare the present situation with the previous situations, I can see three major changes, which I want to mention briefly. One, the Palestinians started to build a state. Lets not underestimate it. And we learned from early age, from the early beginning felt that better build a state without borders than negotiate borders within every state, so to this very day, in our declaration of independence, there is no borders. I think if the Palestinians started to negotiate about borders and postponing building a state, its a mistake from their side, because the problem with borders here is there was never a Palestinian state -- we didnt have a precedent like we had with the Jordanians and with Egypt and so we didnt have borders as we did have with the Jordanians, Egyptians, Lebanese, and Syrians and also because in that case borders have a holy aspect to it, as well. Jerusalem does not trust a territorial border.

So the effect that the United States, the Israeli government, the Palestinian Authority -- all of them agreed to build a state is an innovation and a very promising process that we have to support and enlarge. And I do not see much difficulties in continuing to do so. I think we have to be, all of us, more generous, more compromising and to supply the Palestinians with the necessary means to build their own home. If it would -- we do just that, they would say we are escaping the negotiations. We are not. So the building of a state is not instead of the negotiations, but in addition to it. The negotiations, its very hard to open it and all of us know there will be -- as it is always -- a difference between the opening position and the fall-back position. The opening position is tougher and everybody emphasizes the difference. Anyway, I dont know a way -- how can you start with the fall-back positions. Even in Hollywood, the happy end is at the end; you dont begin negotiations with the happy end. So the present declarations on both sides are very careful, and everybody wants to shop as much as he can his own position.

And I think we have accepted, as a matter of fact -- and I dont think it will save us the difficulties, but lets not see in it the end of the negotiations or the end of the day. Thats the second thing that I believe why its better to have it. The third change which I see is the Iranian presence. I think the tone and extremacy of Ahmadinejad against Israel is a cover up of his own ambition to create hegemony in the Middle East, since he doesnt want to appear as a Shiite or a Sunnite. He wants to appear as an anti-Israel, which gives him an entry to other countries. And that way, everybody is using Israel as an excuse or a cover up for their real positions. I believe the higher-ups are aware that Iran is a danger to them. More than a thousand years of history in the Middle East -- there is thousand years, 900 years the Arabs were under occupation of empires, and Muslims as well. Its only in the last 100 years they have had any independence. And they dont want to give up, rightly so, their independence. And understand that in the name of religion, Iran is trying to establish a super structure of the Iranians in the Middle East.

But at the same time, short of President Mubarak who stood up and some other leaders, theyre reluctant to declare their real position because of the conflict between us and the Palestinians. Everybody uses the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as a cover up. And I think its a strange situation over the world that the secret relations are better than the open relations, that the relations among the different intelligence organizations are better than the diplomatic one. The reason is diplomacy covers and intelligence discovers, because today to win the fight against the terrorists is not a victory but a discovery. If you discover them ahead of time, you win it. But I think we -- sorry -- we have had many problems in the domain of, I think, terrorists. In our own domain, we are very successful and that should serve as an example. And that is the model of our relations or the relations between Jordan and ourselves. No matter what the political mood is, the two countries decided not to permit terrorists to play on. And the Jordanians are the most quiet border -- all the time between us and the Jordanians, understanding that today its not a total war, but a war against the terrorists. I want to make a short remark about Iran as I see it.

First of all, the United States should lead the Iranian policy -- there is nobody else in the world. The United States, with whatever criticism you may have, you are the most serious, the most organized, and the most analytical approach to the Iranian. And we have trust in President Obama. I dont envy neither you nor him. You have inherited an extremely difficult situation worldwide and otherwise. And its easy to give advice. I know it. Its more difficult to face the trials that are coming from uninvited angles, and participation. I believe that the best policy vis--vis Iran, and Im speaking of -- from our perspective -- I cannot suggest to do it in my advice -- should comprise three major efforts -- one, which is major, and that is the moral code. I think moral sanctions are not less important than economic sanctions. A person like Ahmadinejad that calls openly to destroy the state of Israel cannot be a full member of the United Nations. A man that calls for acts in terror and who hangs people in the streets, not just because of the Israeli conflict -- and as Hillary described him as a military dictator. I think he should be placed in his proper definition. He cannot go around almost like a cultural hero.

However, President Obama considers Niebuhr as his philosophical preference. I like to listen to the lectures of Reinhold Niebuhr. The subject was the Judeo-Christian heritage. The first six lectures were about Judeo-Christians. I never heard anything more profound or more moving than that. But he said one word which I believe fits the present situation. He says all of us have to stand up against moral corruption. But moral corruption is more dangerous even than financial corruption. And the first code, in my judgment, is to voice a real struggle against the moral corruption. From an Israeli standpoint, we are totally surprised. They try to de-legitimize us. Were a democratic country. Nobody is being hanged in Israel. We try to make peace. We give back land. We are in a difficult situation, but still on a moral foundation. So he tries to de-legitimize us or you. We are the Satan; he is the Lord. So I think that must be done in a strong and clear voice. It will also help the people of Iran, the Persians, to continue their struggle to defend their culture. They are ashamed of him. In my judgment, this should be done strongly, clearly, vocally.

Then the economic sanctions, which I dont have to advise. Maybe I would like to see a third point, and that is to surround Iran with an envelope of self-defense -- the Palestinians side, as well -- against their missiles and nuclear trap. And nobody knows exactly what theyre going to do. But self-defense will be an additional weight in limiting the danger of Iran. Again, only you can do it. Thats one point. And I want to say about the Palestinians, there is a way to increase the help to the Palestinians to build their state. I know that our government is ready to continue the dismantling of different checkpoints to free the movement. The Palestinians have never had a state in their history, and now theyre beginning to taste what does it mean to build a city or to plan trees or to introduce an economy. On all this, we as the immediate neighbor -- you as the guiding the party, and the Europeans, and the Russians, everybody -- can participate in helping them to build a state, which I want to say must be affluent. And its not to build another poor state; that would be a mistake. If we are going to build, lets build it a modern state. And I believe that the Palestinians have already leaders.

The person that built the city, Bashar Masri, for example, is an extremely intelligent man, up to date -- Rawabi is the new city of the Palestinians. And we have to introduce hi-tech. They cannot make a living just on land. The problem today is not the land, but the level of knowledge. Agriculture went down only to two or three percent. And Israel is an example of making a living out of knowledge, out of hi-tech. We are ready to share. And I believe that they can be providing those of -- money. I want to identify immediately. I wont ask from you today money. But I think the Monetary Fund is willing and able to provide serious amounts of money. I spoke with the head of the Monetary Fund. They say that they can support trends; they dont have to support enterprises, contrary to the World Bank. And if the trend is peace, they are ready to invest seriously. In uniting, you have to take them in the picture. Thats number one. Now, in the negotiations itself, I know the mood. I know that among the Palestinians there is mistrust vis--vis Israel and our government. We are aware of it. What Im asking -- and why is that?

Because there isnt -- if Israel would be against a Palestinian state, would we permit you to build an economy, a police force, institutions? Why are we doing it? And I believe that as things will progress, we can handle the responsibilities for security wherever and whenever they will be ready. For example, if Jenin can police herself, our army will be glad to hand over the security to them. And if there are six or seven cities, lets go. We suggested, like in the road map to recognize the Palestinian state with provisional borders. But the Palestinians didnt like it, and Mubarak told me leave it alone. They are getting angry with it. Okay. So we dont need lines. We dont need -- okay, I shall stop here, because – VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: No, Im anxious -- I love hearing you speak. (Laughter.) I really do. Ive told you, Mr. President, you are the most articulate statesman I have ever known. And I have been around for a long, long time. I always -- I always enjoy not only your knowledge, but your wisdom. I mean that sincerely. You know I have told you that over the years. PRESIDENT PERES: I know.

I keep it – VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, let me just briefly respond. PRESIDENT PERES: Yes. VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: First of all, you know you talked about my being a friend of Israel from the time I was a young senator. PRESIDENT PERES: What was it, 32? VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Thirty years old -- 29, actually. But I arrived at the Senate educated by a righteous Christian, my father, who -- we spent our dinner table -- we assembled at our dinner table in the evening to have discussions and incidentally eat rather than eat and incidentally have discussions. And -- but Israel captured my heart. I make no bones about it. That does not mean I do not understand and have a great empathy for the circumstances of the Palestinians, but Israel captured my heart and my imagination. And my first visit here as a young senator, I sat before the desk of Golda Meir as she was chain smoking and pulling maps up and down behind me, explaining to me the Six Day War. And there was a young man sitting to my right, his name was Rabin.

So I have had the great privilege of not only knowing you, but knowing every Prime Minister and President since the days of Golda Meir. I think your observation is one that more of the world should understand, because as you pointed out, there is an international attempt to isolate Israel and -- right now. And sometimes, we are our own worst enemy and playing into the hands of those who wish to do that. The peace process, as you pointed out, has two components to it, it always has: the actual definition of a state by borders and sovereign immunity and sovereign capabilities, but also the actual stuff of which a state is made. Institutions, everything from security forces to tax collection capability and everything in between. And that is underway. And I hope -- notwithstanding the mistrust you referenced, I hope the beginning of what I referred to as these indirect or proximity talks, I hope it is a vehicle, a vehicle by which we can begin to allay that layer of mistrust that has built over the last several years. Because if you look at the region, there is obviously a great deal more that should be uniting the Palestinians and the Israelis than any time since Ive been involved for 36 years.

You point out that the great Persian people have had their history besmirched by the presence of the -- Mr. Ahmadinejad and the theocracy. But I would point out, Mr. President, that the moral sanctions you refer to have begun -- and need not have been imposed by us, theyre being imposed by their own people. The people of Iran are making that argument clearly, engaging in their own form of morally sanctioning their government as we have and as the rest of the world is. I remote -- since our administration has come to power, I would point out that Iran is more isolated -- internally, externally -- has fewer friends in the world. One of the reasons why President Obama insisted on engaging was in the -- was with eyes wide open. The hope was that there would be some movement. But the reality was -- the reality was so that we could in a sense point out to the rest of the world we need to deal with many of the things you mentioned. But let me conclude in my very brief response here that I -- I think this -- we are at a moment of real opportunity.

And I think that the -- the interest of both the Palestinians and the Israeli people are -- if everyone will just step back and take a deep breath -- are actually very much more in line than they are in opposition. And when I first came here, my first 10 or 12 trips, the idea that we would speak with certitude about a two-state solution wasnt so obvious. So Id like to focus with you -- if we have a chance to speak privately, Id like to focus with you on how we -- how we take advantage of this moment for the security of Israel. I just want to conclude by saying one thing that I know you understand -- I know you understand about me and I know you understand it about President Obama -- theres absolutely no space between the United States and Israel in terms of Israels security and our mutual security -- none, none at all. Thats the basis in which this starts. Theres a lot we can do. But Im really flattered you would see me. And I’m anxious to – PRESIDENT PERES: We were waiting for you. (Laughter.) VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: Well, its good to be home. (Laughter.) END

Question: What is the name of the current President of Israel?
Answer: SHIMON PERES